1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under S.33 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1997 (hereinafter for short "the Act of 1997"), for setting aside th award dated 27 August, 2009 passed by the Arbitrator (Chief Executive, Wakaf Board).

2. The facts emanating from the pleadings of the parties reveals that an agreement came to be executed between the petitioner and the J and K Wakaf Board on 8th February, 2006, whereby the petitioner was allotted the work of construction of four storeyed shopping complex at Munawarabad Srinagar, at estimated cost of approximately Rs.36.00 lacs. As per clause 34 of the agreement, the differences or questions arising between the parties relating to or in respect or the agreement or the subject matter of the agreement were to be referred to the arbitration of the Chairman of Jammu and Kashmir Board for Specified Wakaf's and Specified Wakaf Properties or his nominee whose decisions were made final and binding on the parties.

3. It seems that disputes arose between the petitioner and the respondent Wakaf Board, whereafter the petitioner filed arbitration petition No.02/2007 before this Court. Vide order dated 03.12.2007, this Court in the light of clause 34 of the agreement referred the matter for arbitration of the Chairman, Jammu and Kashmir Board for Specified Wakaf's and Specified Wakaf Properties, with a direction to pass the award within two months. However, an application came to be filed by the respondent Wakaf Board before this Court praying therein that instead of the Chairman, his nominee may be appointed as the Arbitrator. Accordingly, on 13.02.2008, order dated 03.12.2007 was modified by providing that the matter shall be referred to the arbitration of the nominee of the Chairman of the Board and the award shall be made within two months.

4. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, the Chairman of the Board in terms of order dated 13.03.2008, nominated Chief Executive Wakaf Board as Arbitrator in the matter. The arbitration proceedings were conducted by the Chief Executive and the time for making the award was extended by this court in terms of various orders passed from time to time. The last order for extension of time in making the award was passed by this Court on 29.07.2009 and the Arbitrator was permitted one month's time to make the th award. Thereafter impugned award dated 27 August, 2009 came to be passed by the Arbitrator which is under challenge in the present petition.

5. The main ground urged by the petitioner for impugning the award is that the petitioner was not permitted to lead evidence by the Arbitrator in support of his claims and, as such, the arbitral award is liable to be set aside being against the public policy of the State.

6. The respondent Wakaf Board has raised a preliminary objection to the maintainability of this petition on the ground that the same is barred by limitation. It has been contended that the impugned award was made on 27th August, 2009 but the present petition has been filed on 17.07.2013 and, as such, the same is hopelessly time barred

7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused record of the case.

8. Before proceeding to decide merits of the case, it would be necessary to advert to the preliminary objection raised by the respondents with regard to maintainability of this petition.

9. Learned Senior Counsel, appearing for the petitioner, has contended that the petitioner was never furnished the copy of the signed award as mandated under S.31(1) of the Act of 1997, which is applicable to the present case, as such, the limitation period for assailing the impugned award would not run against him unless he is provided signed copy of the award. In this regard, the learned Senior Counsel has relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Maharashtra and Others v. ARK Builders (P) Ltd. 2011 (4) SCC 616 : (AIR 2011 SC 1374).

10. There can be no dispute to the legal position that delivery of signed copy